Haynes v. Bexley Police Dep't

Full title: RICHARD R. HAYNES Requester v. BEXLEY POLICE DEPARTMENT Respondent

Court: Court of Claims of Ohio

Date published: Dec 29, 2022

2022 Ohio 4828 (Ohio Ct. Cl. 2022)

Opinion

2022-00572PQ

12-29-2022

RICHARD R. HAYNES Requester v. BEXLEY POLICE DEPARTMENT Respondent

Patrick E. Sheeran Judge

Sent to S.C. Reporter 1/9/23

JUDGMENT ENTRY

Patrick E. Sheeran Judge

{¶1} On December 13, 2022, a Special Master issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) in this public-records case. The Special Master recommends denial of a motion to dismiss filed by Respondent. (R&R, 2.) The Special Master states:

Upon consideration of the pleadings and attachments the Special Master recommends the court find that requester's claim for production of records is moot. The Special Master further recommends the court find that respondent failed to produce the records within a reasonable period of time. It is recommended requester be entitled to recover from respondent the amount of the filing fee of twenty-five dollars and any other costs associated with the action that were incurred by requester, and that court costs be assessed to respondent.

(R&R, 6.)

{¶2} Neither party has timely objected to the Report and Recommendation, as permitted by R.C. 2743.75(F)(2). Pursuant to R.C. 2743.75(F)(2), if neither party timely objects to a special master's report and recommendation, then this Court is required to "promptly issue a final order adopting the report and recommendation, unless it determines that there is an error of law or other defect evident on the face of the report and recommendation."

{¶3} Upon review, the Court determines that there is no error of law or other defect evident on the face of the Report and Recommendation. The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation. In accordance with the Special Master's Report and Recommendation, the Court denies Respondent's motion to dismiss; the Court finds that Requester's claim for production of records is moot; and the Court finds that Respondent failed to produce records within a reasonable period of time. Because Respondent denied Requester access to public records in violation of R.C. 149.43(B), Requester is entitled to recover from Respondent the amount of the filing fee of twenty-five dollars and any other costs associated with the action that are incurred by the Requester, excepting attorney fees. Court costs are assessed to Respondent. The Clerk shall serve upon all parties notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal.